COMPARATIVE STUDY
JOURNAL ARTICLE
OBSERVATIONAL STUDY
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Comparison Between the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire and New York Heart Association in Assessing Functional Capacity and Clinical Outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: The Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ) has emerged as a patient-centered heart failure-specific health status measure. It currently lacks routine and widespread use in clinical practice and trials. The purpose of this study was to examine the correlation between KCCQ and cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) parameters and clinical outcomes, compared with the New York Heart Association functional classification (NYHA).

METHODS AND RESULTS: We performed a single-centered observational analysis of 432 patients who presented to the Heart Failure Department, completed the KCCQ, and underwent CPET. The 1-year clinical outcome assessed was a composite of mortality, heart failure hospitalization, and need for heart transplantation or left ventricular assist device. In the KCCQ, the physical limitation domain had a correlation with peak VO2 similar to NYHA (r = 0.48; P < .001; and r = -0.48; P < .001; respectively), and slightly better correlation with ventilatory threshold (r = 0.42; P < .001; and r = -0.40; P < .001; respectively). According to model validation, the KCCQ physical limitation domain and NYHA were similar predictors of peak VO2 (r2  = 0.229; and r2  = 0.227; respectively). KCCQ predicted the specified 1-year clinical outcome (hazard ratio 0.75, 95% confidence interval 0.69-0.82; P < .001) and provided incremental predictive ability when added to a model that included NYHA, with a net reclassification index of 76.1% (P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS: KCCQ and NYHA provide similar assessment of functional capacity. KCCQ predicts 1-year clinical outcomes, providing incremental value over NYHA. These findings support its routine use in clinical care, as well as its potential to serve as a measure in clinical trials.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app